(J unci /bb bia A 



pH8J 



E 668 
.W71 
Copy 1 



RECONSTMCTIOI. 



Speech of Hon. GEO. H. WILLIAMS, delivered at Portland, 
Oregon, September 23d, 1867. 



•W7/ 



LIBRARY Or CON. 
'" -'VED 

DOCUMEV : -. DIVISION 



t^^ 



RECONSTRUCTION. 



Speech of Hon. GEO. H. WILLIAMS, delivered at Portland, 
Oregon, September 23d, 1867. 



Fellow Citizens, 

To you I made ray salutatory upon my arrival from Washington, and 
now as I am about to return, I come to make ray valedictory speech. I 
have just com])leted a journey during which, with one or two exceptions, 
I have addressed the people of every county in this State. I have been 
to refresh ni}'' eyes once more with its diversified and beautiful scenery, 
and to renew my personal associations with its patriotic and happy people. 
Everywhere I have found the signs of prosperity. Intelligence and virtue 
keep pace with wealth and population. The watch fires of the Union 
cause are burning brightly for Freedom, Humanity and Justice. To 
Heaven our gratitude is due, for while civil war has afflicted man}'' parts 
of our country with bloody strife and bitter penury, " peace has been 
within our borders and plenteousness in all our habitations." Coincident 
with the breaking out of the rebellion there was a political organization 
formed from men of all parties, which has since been called the Union 
])arty, and to the patriotism, power and courage of this organization, this 
8tate is to-day indebted for its unbroken peace and the nation for its con- 
tinued existence. 

Steps were taken, as you all know, to aid Southern Secession by the 
establishment of a Pacific Republic which would have involved us in war, 
but these steps were defeated in the start by the timely substitution of 
Sumner for Johnson in the command of the troops on this coast, and the 
energy and zeal of the friends of the Government in coming together to 
resist any attempt to dissolve the Union. Antagonistic to the Union men 
was the Democratic partj^ — once a liberal and jji'ogressive, now a bigoted 
and conservative party. Characterized in earlier days b}^ hostility to 
monopolies, class legislation, and the unjust and artificial distinctions of 
society, it claimed that the blessings of Grovernment like the dews of 
Heaven should descend alike upon all; and its party shibboleth was the 
electric words of Andrew Jackson that " The Federal Union must and 
shall be preserved." Calhounism however found its way into the party 
and worked like poison. Contrary to the teachings of the Fathers that 
Slavery was a political, social and moral evil, it came to teach the ethics 
pf Callioun that Slavery was a political, social and moral blessing, and 
then it came to teach (^Facilis est descensus avenii) that the Slave holding 
States had a right to desti-oy the Union and set u]) a Southern Confeder- 



[4] I 

aey upon its ruins whose chief corner stone should be the institution of 
Slaver}^. When tlie Southern Democracy that supported Breckinridge in 
18G0, plunged the nation into a war for disunion, it was sympathized with 
and encoui-aged by the Democratic organization of the North, excepting 
individuals. Gov. Orr said in a speech delivered in Charleston on the 2d 
of last April, that his Democratic friends in the North and West pledged 
their faith that if the " war was comn:»enced it would be north of Mason 
and Dixon's line and not in the South." Buchanan's administration, as 
you know, after the rebel flag was raised, took the ground that " The 
Federal Government could not coerce a Sovereign State." On this coast 
the party did not hesitate to define its position. In June, 18(51, the Dem- 
ocratic Coiivcntion of California "Resolved, That we are opposed to the 
employment of force by the General Grovernment against the Seceded 
States for the purpose of compelling obedience and submission to Federal 
authorit}''." Resolutions of similar import were elsewhei'e adopted. 
Suppose that a majority of the people on this coast and elsewhei'c had 
adopted Buchanan's policy or the doctrine of the resolution I have just 
read instead of rallying around the standard of the Union cause ; is there 
any one so stupid as not to see that now instead of a nation, we should 
have its " dishonored fragments," and our flag, instead of flashing defiance 
to every power upon earth, as it now does, would be trailing its starry 
folds under the derision and contempt of all mankind. Suggested by this 
brief review is the very pertinent enquiry: How can you safelj" put jouv 
confidence in a party whose policy three or four years ago would have 
destroyed or acquiesced in the destruction of the Nation ? Not long prior 
to my departure for Washington, I addressed you upon the questions then 
before the countrj-, but I come now to speak of other and different issues. 
Then there was a terrific war in the land. Hundreds of thousands of 
men in arms were fighting for the overthrow of the Government and the 
future destiny of the Republic hung upon the doubtful fortunes of the 
battle field. I then argued that it was the duty of every man to support 
the Government, to give to the administration of Abraham Lincohi a 
practical and efiicient support, and to do all he could by his voice and vote 
to impart success to the Union cause. Democracy denounced these argu- 
ments with vigorous hostility, and declared that " the war for the Union 
w^as an unconstitutional and unnecessary war — that the administration of 
Lincoln was guilty of usurpation and tyranny and that any effort to sup- 
press the rebellion bj^ force Avould be a failure." History has already 
passed i^s judgment u])on these issues, and it stands irreversibly recorded 
that the Democratic party was as false in its arguments and predictions 
during the war as it was unfriendly to the cause of a bleeding country. 
When the enemies of the Union were defeated in battle the country was 
called upon to meet those questions left unsettled, and others of a difficult 
nature growing out of the struggle. Depending upon military power for 
their existence, the Confederate Governments when that power foiled 
passed away like the baseless fabric of a dream. Territory, and people 
dwelling upon that territory were left, but there were no organizations oi 
any kind, and the wdiolo insurrectionary region was very jnuch as the 
earth was described to be at the beginning, " without form and void." 
Business, commei'ce and currency were gone. Disappointment, destitu- 
tion and tears spread their gloomy pall over the hind. To add to which, 
there were three or four millions of slaves set free and thrown by the. 
convulsions of the war penuyless, houseless, and friendless, upon th( s 
charities of the nation. To deal with this cauldron of seething passion 
and chaos of elements was no easy thing. When the rebel armies sui 



1 



r [5] 

^■cndered Congress was not in session, therefore it became the duty of the 
President to take the first and immediate actiou in view of that event. 
Two legitimate ways were open for him to pursue. One was to convene 
Congress in extra session, as President Lincohi did at the commencement 
of the war, and the otiier was to provide iu the exercise of his military- 
power as Commander-in-Chief of the Army, for temporary military Gov- 
ernments to protect the public peace until the next regular session of 
Congress. President Johnson, instead of pursuing either course, under- 
took to organize civil Governments for each of the rebel States. Much 
animated controversy has occurred upon this subject in Congress and 
elsewhere, but no clause or provision of the Constitution has been or can 
be found conferring authority upon the President to set up an3-where or 
under any circumstances a civil Government. President Johnson, how- 
ever, made proclamation appointing (iovernors, providing for Conventions, 
declaring who should be eligible as delegates, and what ])art of the people 
should be electors, and tlien dictating wliat the Constitutions when made 
should contain. Whatever the motives of the President were, all this 
was clearly an usurpation of power. When the o9th Congress assembled, 
on the 1st Monday of December, 18G5, these Johnson Governments Yxixd 
gone into operation and developed their nature and eftects. Elections had 
been held at which all the State offices were filled witli men who had been 
prominent and active iu the rebellion. Senators and Representatives in 
Congress were chosen, most of whom had been members of the Confed- 
erate Government or officers in tlie rebel arm}", among whom were A. H. 
Stephens, Vice President of the Southern Confederacy, H. V. Johnson and 
W. A. Graham, Senators in the rebel Congress; Cook, Wofford, McGowan 
and others, who had been Generals in the rebel army. Union men were 
not only denied political privileges and preferment, but they were pro- 
scribed in business and put under the social ban and in every wa}' 
treated as aliens and enemies. ISTotwithstanding the adoption of the 
Constitutional Amendment abolishing Slavery which was onl}^ a recogni- 
tion of the result produced by the war, the most odious and wicked 
features of the Slave code were re-enacted, and Garret Davis of Kentucky 
in a speech which he delivered in the Senate, giving expression to rebel 
sentiment upon this question, declared that " Notwithstanding the Consti- 
tutional amendment or any legislation by Congress, Slavery existed and 
always would exist in the Southern States." 

Congress therefore, when it assembled, was not only required to pass 
upon the validity of these Johnson Governments, but to judge of their loy- 
alty and justice in view of these effects. To make sure of the facts. Con- 
gress when it assembled, raised a joint committee of the two Houses, with 
power to examine persons and papers, and before this committee witnesses 
from all classes were called to testify, including Lee, De Bow, and other 
advocates and supporters of the rebellion. President Johnson made the 
raising of this committee the occasion of a savage attack upon Congress, 
and in a public speech denounced it as an " irresponsible central directory," 
when its sole purpose was to obtain evidence as to the temper, feelings 
and conduct of tiie people in the South, and thereupon to make such recom- 
mendations to Congress as such evidence seemed to require. I think it 
proper to say something here of the disagreement between the President 
and Congress bj^ which, no doubt, the distraction and difficulties ;of the 
country have been jn-otracted. Much effort has been made by the Demo- 
cratic party in its su])port of Johnson, to throw the blame upon Congress, 
but I affirm that it is chargeable to the vacillation or perfidy of the Presi- 
dent. I submit in proof oi" this assertion in the first place an extract from 



[ 6 ] 

a letter addressed by the President to W. L. 8hat"key, of Mississippi, dated 
August 15tb, 18(55, as follows : 

"If 3'ou could extend the elective franchise to all persons of color who 
can read the Constitution of the United States in English and write their 
names, and to all persons of color who own real estate, valued at not less 
than two hundred and tifty dollars, and pay taxes thereon, you would cijin- 
])letely disarm the adversary and set an example the other States will fol- 
low. This 3^ou can do with perfect safety, and you thus place the South- 
ern States, in reference to free persons of color, upon the same basis with 
the free States. 1 hope and trust your convention will do this, and, as a 
consequence, the radicals, who are wild upon negro franchise, will be com- 
pletely foiled in their attempt to keej) the Southern States from renewing 
their relations to the Union by not accepting their Senators and Repi*e- 
sentatives.* ANDREW JOHNSON, President of the U. S." 

Notice the date of this letter if j'ou please, and you will see that several 
months before Congress assembled, and while Union men and Union jour- 
nals were expressing their confidence in the President, he was confeder- 
ating with Sharkey, of Mississippi, and others " to disarm the adversary," 
and " to completely foil the radicals." Who was the " adversary " to be 
disarmed, but the Union ])arty of the country, and who were the "radi- 
cals" to be foiled, but the men who had given to Andrew Johnson their 
confidence, and by their votes made him Vice President r* Was there any 
])rovocation for this letter in what Congress did raoaths after it was writ- 
ten ? I think it is evident that at the date of this letter Johnson had 
formed the design of building up a new political party to defeat the men 
by whom be had been elected, which design was more fully developed in 
that abortive miscegenation of politicians which assembled in Philadelphia 
in August, 1866. Negro suffrage in Mississippi, now so terrible to Johnson's 
supportci'S, was to be the means by which the " adversary " was to be dis- 
armed and his partisan purposes accomplished. Some people question the 
sincerity of Johnson during the rebellion, but it appears to me that he has 
changed. Nobody will deny that his so-called •■ policy" is in clear conflict 
with his views and opinions prior to its adoption. 

On the 9th of June, 18(^4, Johnson among tjther things said in a speech ^ 
at Nashville : 

" AVhy all this carnage and devastation ? It was that treason migiit bo 
put down and traitors punished. Therefore I saj'that traitors should take 
a back seat in the work of restoration. If there be but five thousand men 
in Tennessee loyal to the Constitution, \oyii\ to freedom, loyal to justice, 
these true and faithful men should control the work of reorganization and 
reformation absolutel}*. I say that the ti-ailor has ceased to be a citizen, 
and in joining the rebellion has become a pul>lic enemy. He forfeited his 
right to vote with loyal men when he renounced his citizenship and sought 
to destro}^ our Government. Treason must be made odious, and traitors 
must be punished and impoverished. Their great plantations must be 
►seized, and divided into small farms, and sold 1o honest, industrious men." 

On the 21st of April, ]8()5, he said : 

" It is not promulging anything that T b.ave not heretofore said to say 
tliat traitors must be made odious, that l-eason must be made odious, that 



[7] 

f. raitors must bo punislicd and impoverished. * =" * * And 
1. say that, after makiiii; treason odious, every Union man and the Govern- 
ment should be remunerated out of the pockets of those who have inflict- 
ed this great surtering u])on the countr3^" 

President Johnson, it will bo seen by these extracts, takes the ground 
" that traitors should take a back seat in the work of restoi-alion— " that 
" loj-al men should absolutely control the work of reorganization," that 
"traitors had ceased to be citizens and forfeited the right to vote," that 
the}- ought to be punished and impoverished and their social power de- 
stroj'ed, that their property ought " to bo seized and every Union man 
and the (iovernment remunerated out of their pockets;" positions in ad- 
vance of which neither Stevens or Sumner has ever gone. Who will pre- 
tend to say that a policy that proclaims universal pardon to traitors and 
puts the reorganization of the rebel States into their hands is in keeping 
with these declarations 'i No doubt the Union inen of the country gener- 
ally agreed with Johnson at the time ho made these speeches, that " trait- 
ors should take a back seat in the work of restoration," and a great out- 
cry has been made against Congress because it did not abandon this posi- 
tion when the President did. Congress when it assembled in December, 
1805, did not at once set aside the Johnson Governments, but proceeded 
with other legislation which the circumstances of the country immediately 
required. The Act for tlic relief of Freedmen and Refugees was passed. 
War had devastated the South and made thousands of people, white and 
black, homeless and destitute, and this Act was demanded by humanity to 
save them from suffering and starvation. Great paius have been taken by 
the Democrats to make it appear that this legislation was exclusively for 
*the freedmen, but the bill by its terms applied equally to " refugees and 
freedmen," and its benefactions reached need}^ persons of every class and 
color. According to official reports, from the Ist of .Tune, 1865, to the 1st 
of April, 1866, there were issued in Alabama 879,353 rations to whites, and 
364,215 to blacks, and in Arkansas during the same time there were issued 
1,004,862 rations to whites, and 715,572 to blacks, and in other parts of the 
South the charities of this Bureau were largely divided. Johnson vetoed 
this Bill, not because it disturbed his State Governments, for it did not, but 
because it Avas a pai't of the Johnson-Sharkey programme of the tight with 
Congress. President Johnson said to Congress in his annual message of 
Dec. 4th, 1865, "that good faith requires the security of the freedmen in 
their liberty and in their property, their right to labor and the right to 
claim the just return of their labor." Congress therefore passed the Civil 
Rights Bill, which gave to "every person born in the United States and 
not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, the right 
to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties and give evidence, to in- 
herit, purchase, lease, sell, hold and convey real and personal property, 
and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security 
of person and property as enjoyed by white citizens," and this Bill, too, 
was vetoed. Common sense ought to teach any man that freedom to the 
blacks of the South without the rights conferred by this Bill would be a 
mockery and a curse. Following and including these there were more 
than a dozen vetoes ; this accidental President assuming that ho had more 
wisdom and patriotism as to nearly all the leading subjects of legislation 
before Congress, than the 33 Sesators and 120 Representatives whoso united 
judgment and action he was trying to overrule and defeat. All this shows 
who was the aggressor in the contest between the President and Congi-ess. 
Lfter the examination of a vast amount of evidence and thorough discus- 



[8] 1 

sion Congress came to the conclusion that some constitutional guarantee!: 
for the future safety and peace of the country were necessary, and there- 
fore Article 14 was submitted to the several kStates for ratification. I shall 
not discuss this Article in extenso, because it has been considered and passed 
upon by the people. All its provisions are reasonable and just, but there 
is one which seems to have escaped general notice, aud to which I will call 
3^our attention. Sec. 4 says that "neither the United States nor any State 
shall pay any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave." Many facts 
were elicited to show that there was a wide spread conviction in the South 
that the Slaveholders ought to be indemnified for their Slaves made free, 
and without going into detail I refer for proof to the proceedings of the 
Georgia Convention which, to a resolution acquiescing in the destruction 
of Slaver}'', attached the following proviso : 

i<- Provided, That acquiescence in the action of the Government of the 
United States is not intended to operate as a relinquishment, or waiver, 
or estoppel, of such claim for compensation of loss sustained by reason of 
the emancipation of his slaves, as any citizen of Georgia may hereafter 
make upon the justice and magnanimity of that Government." 

Jeff. Thompson, in a letter dated June Gth, 1867, estimates the Slave prop- 
erty of the South before the rebellion at four thousand millions of dollars. 
Suppose the 22 Senators and 61 Eepresentatives from the rebel States had 
been admitted at once to their seats in Congress, who can tell with what 
success by the dexterous use of a part of this vast fund, they might have 
prosecuted the claim? Who can say that those interested and their sym- 
pathizei'S may not at some future day have the ascendency in the Govern- 
ment? Will not the property holders and tax payers of the country jus- 
tify Congress in taking the necessary steps for the constitutional extinc- 
tion of this immense and dangerous claim? President Johnson was of 
course opposed to the Constitutional Amendment. He took an appeal to 
the people, and " swung round the circle " to support that appeal, but the 
people decided against him. He ought to have acquiesced in that decision, 
but he did not, and through his advice and influence with the co-operation 
of the Democratic party, the rebel States were induced to reject the amend- 
ment with expressions of hatred and contempt for Congress — a decision 
which they have since deeply regretted. I desire to say in reference to 
that amendment that it pi'offered an adjustment of our national difficulties 
without enforcing upon any State the enfranchisement of the black man. 
Congress said in effect to the rebel States, '* Agree to this and regulate suf- 
frage for yourselves," but they would not do it. Tennessee accepted the 
proposition, and her Senators and Eepresentatives were promptly admit- 
ted, and so no doubt it would have been with the other rebel States if they 
had followed the example of Tennessee. Some have claimed that Congress 
in submitting this amendment recognized the reorganization of the rebel 
States. This is the position of the President, but Congress has never 
assented to it. I think it is the opinion of a majority of Congress that the 
ratification of three-fourths of the loyal States made the amendment a part 
of the Constitution, because the rebel States had deprived themselves of 
the legal capacity to act thereon by the voluntary destruction of their 
State Governments, but Congress demanded the assent of these States as 
far as they were able to give it, as an evidence of their willingness to ac- 
quiesce in and abide by the terms of reconstruction proposed by Congress. 
Twenty-four out of the tAventy-seven loyal States ratified this amendment. . 
What I have said as to the views of Congi-ess upon this, also applies to th' 



:-inendmeiit abolishinp; Slaveiy. One great question is, as to the power of 
Congress to impose any terms of restoration upon tlie rebel States, and 
this involves that other question, about which so much has been said, as 
to whether these States were in or out of the Union. Our political oppo- 
nents say to us, "You took the ground during the rebellion tliat the States 
could not go out, and now you say they are out of the Union." I deny 
that the Union party has ever assumed that these States were out of the 
Union, in any other sense than Johnson and the Democratic party have 
assumed that tiiey were out of the Union. President Johnson in all his 
proclamations appointing Provisional Governors used this language. I 
quote I'rom the proclamation as to North Carolina: 

"And whereas the rebellion, which has been waged by a portion of the 
people of the United States against the properly constituted authorities of 
the Grovernment thereof, in the most violent and revolting form, butAvhosc 
organized and revolting ibrces have novv' been almost entirely overcome, 
has, in its revolutionary progress, deprived the people of the State of North 
Carolina of all civil government; and whereas it becomes necessaiy and 
proper to carry out and enforce the obligations of the United States to 
the people of North Carolina, in securing them in the enjoyment of a re- 
publican form of government." 

This record commits Johnson and the Democrats who supported him to 
the following positions : 

1st. That the rebellion deprived the rebel States " of all civil Grovern- 
ment." 

2d. That the new State Glovernments to be organized there were not to 
emanate from the people, but were to be provided for them and put in ope- 
ration by the United States. 

Johnson upon the grounds stated in this proclamation proceeds to ap- 
point Governors, regulate the elective franchise, and dictate Constitutional 
provisions to the rebel States. Congress stands upon the same grounds 
and exercises the same if not greater power, and therefore if Congress 
assumes that these States are out of the Union, Johnson and the Demo- 
cratic party assume the same thing. Nobody, however, takes that ground. 
We of the Union party say, as Johnson does, that the rebellion deprived 
the rebel States of "all civil government," and then we say, where there is 
no " civil Government," of course there is no " Kepublican form of Govern- 
ment," and the contingency contemplated by the Constitution has arisen, 
and the United States must perform their duty. Congress and the Presi- 
dent do not differ so much as to the facts, but the President claims that 
the Executive is the " United States," while Congress claims that the Con- 
stitution means by the " United States" the Legislative Department of the 
GTOvernmeut. I will riot ai'gue this question more than to say that the 
President is the Executive officer of the Glovernment — he cannot make or 
unmake law; he is " to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," and, 
to Congress belongs all the functions of legislation. When a Territory 
applies for admission into the Union as a State, its Constitution is submit- 
ted to GJongress. If Congress approves, the State is admitted ; if Congress 
disapproves, the Territory does not become a State. The President has 
nothing to do about it. So with the rebel States. They are without 
" civil Governments," and in that res})ect no better off than Territories. 
CJonoTCss, therefore, by analogy, n\ust authorize or sanction new Constitu- 
tions of State Governments, or they will remain as incapable of action in 
i the Union as Territories are. 1 will refer to an authority on this point 



[10] 

that ought to bo eouclusive with the Democratic party. Chief Justilfe 
Taney, in delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United 
States in Luther vs. Borden, Isr, Howard, after citing the 4th Section of the 
4th Article of the Constitution, that the " United States shall guarantee to 
every State in the Union a Republican form of Government," &c., says : 

" Under this article of the Constitution it rests with Congress to decide 
what Government is the established one in a State. For as the United 
States guarantee to each State a Republican Government, Congress must 
necessarily decide what Government is established in the State before it 
can determine whether it is Republican or not. * * * And 

when the Senators and Repi-esentatives of a State are admitted into the 
Councils of the Union, the authority of the Government under which they 
are appointed, as well as its Republican character, is recognized by the 
proper Constitutional authority, and its decision is binding on ever}^ other 
Department of the Government, and could not bo questioned in a judicial 
tribunal. 

I contend that this authority establishes the exclusive jurisdiction of 
Congress under Sec. 4 of Ai'ticle 4 of the Constitution, and any decision 
by Congress as to the existence or form of a State Government is " bind- 
ing " upon the l^resident. I understand the same doctrine in effect was 
announced by the Supreme Court in the late application by Georgia and 
Mississippi for injunctions to restrain the execution of the Military Re- 
construction Act. When Congress undertakes to act under Sec. 4 of Ar- 
ticle 4, it does not assume that the State is out of the Union, for the lan- 
guage of the Section is, the " United States shall guarantee to every State 
in the Union a Republican form of Government." This assumes that a 
State may be m the Union and not have a Republican form of Government. 

Secretary Seward at one time recognized the control of Congress; for 
on the 24th of July, 1865, he telegraphed to Governor Sharkey, of Missis- 
sippi, as follows : 

" The government of the State will be provisional only until the civil 
government is recognized with the approval of Congress." 

A]kI afterwards he telegraphed Governor Marvin, of Florida, as follows: 

"It must, however, be distinctly understood that the restoration to 
which your proclamation refers will be subject to the decision of Congress." 

Congress in refusing to recognize the rebel States until they accepted its 
terms, only did what President Johnson had done. From time to time 
while their conventions were in session, he telegraphed what they must do 
or he w^ould not recognize them, one of which teiegTams, for example, I 
will read, as follows : 

His ExcELLENCYj James Johnson — 

Frovisional Governor of Georgia : 
Your several telegrams have been received. The President of the United 
States cannot recognize the people of any State as having resumed the 
relations of loyalty to the Union that admits as legal, obligations cotracted 
or debts created in their name, to promote the war of the i-ebellion. 

William H. Seward. •^ 
Washington, October 28, 18G5. ^ 






[11] 



Congress lifis been bitterly denounced because it did not, as it is alleged, 
••'admit loyal Senators and .Representatives from the rebel States to their 
seats in Congress. There were few persons chosen, as to Avhoni this ques- 
tion could arise, but to have admitted Senators and Representatives from 
the rebel States would have been to admit the validity aud suflieiency of 
the Johnson Governments by which tliey were elected. 

Chief Justice Taney says, in the decision referred to, that " when the 
Senators aud Eepreseatatives of a State are admitted into the councils of 
the Union the authorit}^ of the Government under which they are ap- 
].ointed as well as its Eepublican charactei*, is recognized by tlie proper 
Constitutional authority." 

Congress could not do this as to the Johnson Governments without 
endangering the honor and peace of the nation, and the lives and safety 
of the Union men of the South. 

When the Constitutional amendment was rejected by the South, it 
became necessary for Congress to take other steps, and after mature 
deliberation the Military Reconstruction Bill was ])assed over the Presi- 
dent's veto. This bill was intended to give the people of the South ])eace 
and protection. It provides that it shall be the duty of the military 
authorities of the nation in the rebel States " to protect all persons in their 
rights of person and property, to suppi-ess insurrection, disorder and 
violence, and to punish or cause to be punished all disturbers of the public 
peace and criminals 5" and it further provided that under military protec- 
tion all male citizens above the age of 21 years, with the exception of a 
few leading traitors, shall freely participate in the reorganization of the 
State Governments. I have long been of the opinion that the great blun- 
der in reconstruction was the atteuipt of the President to set up civil 
authority amid the fiery passions and battle smoke of civil war, instead 
of temporary military governments. Whei*e hatred, confusion and anar- 
chy prevail as they did in the South, the power that undertakes to govern 
must be independent of the w^arring elements surrounding or it will 
become a mere instrument by which the stronger will tyrannize over the 
weaker faction. This has been the simple history of the Johnson Gov- 
ernments. 

Two questions arise as to this Militarj- Bill — oneisas to its constitutional- 
ity, and the other as to its necessity. All that I have said touching the Con- 
stitutional amendment as to the jurisdiction of Congress over the rebel 
vStates applies to this bill. Congress is invested by the Constitution 
with power " to suppress insurrections," and this of course involves 
the right to decide when and where an insurrection exists and as to 
the means necessary for its suppression. When, therefore. Congress 
decided that there was an insurrection in the South, it could of course 
employ the military force of the nation for its suppression, and I claim 
that it can continue to employ that force until in its judgment the in- 
surrection is at an end. The mere bi-eaking down of the military or- 
ganizations of the insurrection does not necessarily bring it to an end, 
for after that, combinations of individuals may exist, and the temper 
and actions of the people may be such as to defy the Government, des- 
troy the public peace and prevent the enforcement of law. I take the 
gi-ound, however, that the rebel States as to Congress presented a " clean 
slate" for legislation. The Johnson Governments were political non- 
entities. Andrew Johnson breathed into them all the breath of life they 
ever had. Their constitutions weie never voted upon by the people for 
, whom they were made or approved b}- Congress. 
I 



[12] I 

Suppose on the day that Lee surrendered, Congress had been in s* fr- 
sion, could it not then liave made laws for the rebel States with a view to 
reconstruction? Could it have exercised the power the President undertoolc 
to exercise? Isaytbatitcould,and thatits powerin thatrespect wasas per- 
fect in February, 18(57, as it was when Lee surrendered, for it bad been in no 
wise circumscribed, modified, or relinquished. 1 come now to the necessity 
of this legislation. 1 argue in the first place tbat Johnson and bis Demo- 
cratic friends are estopped by their own acts from controverting its neces- 
sity. While they bave been pretending that the rebel States wore fully 
reorganized and tbat the reception of their Senators and Representatives 
b}^ Congress was the only thing wanting, the fact is, tbat these States have 
been governed all the time by the military decrees of Andrew Johnson. 
To appreciate what I am about to say, it is necessarj^ to bear in mind tbat 
the Johnson Governments were set up in the year 1865. On the 1st of 
December, 18G5, the President issued a proclamation revoking the suspen- 
sion of the writ of Habeas Corpus in all excei^t the rebel States. On the 
2d of April, 186G, be proclaimed tbat the rebellion was at an end and 
peace restored. Enquiry" was made b}' General Tilson as to the effect of 
this latter proclamation, and to that enquiry the following answer was 
given : 

Adjutant General's Office, War Department, 

Washington, April 17, 1866. 
The President's proclamation does not -^remove martial law, or operate 
in any way upon the Freedmen's Bureau in the exercise of its legitimate 
jurisdiction. It is not expedient, however to resort to military tribunal in 
any case where justice can be attained through the medium of civil au- 
thority. E. D. Townsend, a. a. G. 

I know" of no other order or proclamation, unless it be the one issued 
a few days since, affecting the suspension of the writ of Habeas Corpus in 
the rebel States. 

On the 17th of January, 1866, General Thomas ordered a Tennessee 
Judge to discontinue a suit pending before him otherwise he would be 
arrested. On the 12tb of the same month General Grant issued an order 
protecting from prosecution or suits in the State or municipal Courts of 
the rebel States " all loyal citizens or persons charged with offences done 
against the rebel forces, directly or indirectly, during the rebellion ; all 
persons in possession of abandoned lands, or other property, under Fed- 
eral authority," and also " prohibiting colored persons from prosecutions 
in any of said States charged with offences for which white persons are 
not prosecuted or punished in the same manner and degree." Here are 
militaiy orders regulating the administration of justice and nullifying 
numberless laws of the Johnson Governments. John S. Monroe was duly 
elected Mayor of New Orleans and one Nixon, Alderman, but the Presi- 
dent by an order excluded them from the offices to which they were 
chosen. Raphael W. Semnies was elected with great unanimity Judge of 
Probate in the city of Mobile, but was not allowed by the President to 
hold the office. Here were elections held according to the laws of the 
Johnson Governments and then set aside by the Presidential mandate as 
though they were the play of boj^s. I do not complain of this. It was 
an effort by the President to save bis policy from the damning odium that 
these elections if allowed to stand, would attach to it; but I will remark 
as 1 pass along, tbat the election of tbat notorious freebooter of the seas, 
li. W. Semmes, b}^ the people of Mobile, is a significant commentary' upon- 
their loyalty and respect for the Federal Government. i' 



I [13] 

No longer ago than the Gth of July, 1866, General Grant issued the 
following order : 

Washington, July 6, 1866. 
[General Orders, IS"©. 44.] 

Department, district and post coninianders in the States lately in 
rebellion are hei-eby directed to arrest all persons who have been or may 
bereal'ter be charged with the commission of crimes and offences against 
officers, agents, citizens, and inhabitants of the United States, irrespective 
of color, in cases where the civil authorities have failed, neglected, or are 
unable to arrest and bring such parties to trial, and to detain them in 
military confinement until such time as a proper judicial tribunal ma}^ be 
ready and willing to try them. 

A strict and prompt enforcement of this order is required. 

By command of Lieutenant General Grant : 

E. T>. TowNSEND, Assistant Adjutant General. 

Taking these instances of the exei-cise of arbitrary power by the 
President, (and he as Commander-in-Chief of the Army is responsible for 
all military oi'ders) I make this point upon him and his party. According 
to their own judgment, military authority in the rebel States is a necessity 
and the State Governments then are what the Union party have claimed 
them to be, inadequate to the protection of life, liberty and property. 
Would President Johnson presume to annul the elections, laws and judi- 
cial decrees of the State of Oregon ? Manifestly not, because in the first 
]ilace the authorities of the State are adequate to the protection of its 
citizens, and in the second place, because the rebellion in his judgment 
has given to the President the right to interfere in the domestic affairs of 
the rebel States — a right which he would not dare to exercise in the loyal 
State of Oregon. I maintain, therefore, that the Military Bill onl}^ regu- 
lates b}^ law a power that has been exercised at the discretion of one 
man. I will proceed now to adduce some.other evidence as to the neces- 
sity of this legislation, and I beg you to remember that the "witnesses I 
bring are not politicians or partizans, but true and tried soldiers on duty 
in the South, and who knowing the truth dare to speak it. Gen. Sickles 
testified in last December before a Committee of Congress as follows : 

I do not think the garrisons can remain in South Carolina or North Carolina 
if ice are to rely upon the civil courts to protect the troops and the property of 
the United States, nor if we are to turn over to the civil courts for trial 
soldiers and officers who may be charged with offenses ; I do not think 
they could expect justice at the hands of Southern Courts and juries; 
there is no remedy, unless the authority of military tribunals bo sustained. 

Again : — I think that the country demands the exercise of martial law 
to-day just as much as did a year ago; so far as the temper of the people 
is concerned it is more necessary. 

General Schofield says : — Cases of hostility and outrage of one kind or 
another by white men upon freedmen are comparatively common, and iu 
almost all such cases the State courts fail to do justice; the difficulty is in 
the disposition of the magistrates and jurors. 

General Baird says : — if a frecdman is murdered, or an offense of high 
grade committed by men who had been in the rebellion, it is impossible to 
get the criminal arrested even, and if he is arrested, he is sure to be re- 



[14] 

leased on very low bail ; the trouble is both with the Jurors and the mag- 
istrates. 

General Wood believed that homicides of Union men, soldiers and 
_J'reed men were on the increase; he never heard of but one instance in 
which a white man was punished for killing a negro, and then the punish- 
ment was only a year in the Penitentiary. 

General Thomas says: — I do not think the civil authorities are dis- 
posed to administer impartial justice, if left to their own will ; the remark 
applies to all the States in n\j department prett}" equally; in Georgia a 
good many offences have been committed against freedmeu; I have not 
taken any note of the number, but I know the}^ are frequent — entirely too 
frequent; I cannot say that I know of a single instance v\'^here they have 
punished any one for a serious offence againsi a freedman ; they have been 
punished sometimes, for slight offences, vfhere the punishment was merely 
a fine, or something slight in its nature ; but in a case where the penalty 
extends to imprisonment or summary punishment, I do not know of a 
single instance ; I do not believe there is much chance of convicting a 
resident or citizen of Georgia for murder, if the victin\ was a Union man 
or a negro ; if the murderer was a Union man or a negro, they would con- 
vict him very speedily, or if the man had moved into Georgia since the 
war and was known as a Northern man or a Union man. The observa- 
tions I make in reference to Georgia apply to the other States with equal 
force. 

Putting all this evidence together, and a thousand times more to the 
same effect might be produced, and it proves either that these witnesses 
were false and perjured or that under the Johnson Governments rebels 
could rob and assassinate Union men and go " unwhipjied of justice." 

Assuming that the testimony is true, which no reasonable man will 
question, then I say Congress was bound by every consideration of grati- 
tude, humanity and justice to protect from rapine and murder those who 
imperiled their all to protect the Government when a gigantic and bloody 
war threatened its destruction. Any government that would in the hour 
of victory abandon its friends under such circumstances, would deserve 
and no doubt receive the contempt of mankiiul, and in any future danger 
its cry for sympathy and aid would only remind the world of its former 
ingratitude and treacher}^. 

I have already said that it was the duty of Congress " to guarantee to 
each State in the Union a Republican form of Government." 

Congress is now attempting to execute that guaranty as to the rebel 
States, and if it be true as it undeniably is, that one part of the people 
there having the power, if left to themselves, would exclude another part 
equally entitled, fi*om any participation in the re-organization of the local 
governments, then I sa}^ that Congress may interfere b}" military power to 
protect the right of the minority. What I mean to affirm is, that Congress 
may employ the military power of the Government to guarantee to any 
State aRe])ublican form of Government, if in their judgment the circum- 
stances make the emplo3nnent of that power necessary, as I think they do 
in the rebel States. 

No feature of the Military Reconstruction Bill so horrifies the 
Democracy as the extension of suffrage to the black men of the 
South. Taking the Democratic ground that negro enfranchisement in the 
rebel States is an evil, and it does not therefore follow that it ought not to 



'h' atlopted. Nations as well us individuals are sometimes compelled to 
eliooso between two evils. Slaveholders by tlieir rebellion compelled the 
nation to choose between the terrible sufferings and sacrifices of war, and 
the destruction of the Government. When our ruitional honor is ajfsailed 
by a foreign power, we are compelled to choose between its vindication at 
a great expense of blood and treasure, and submission to ./the insult. Our 
fathers were compelled to choose between the recognition of Slavery in 
the formation of the Constitution and a neighborhood of jarring and dis- 
cordant States. I do not pretend to say that negro suffrage anywhere is 
desirable. I know iu view of the pi-ejudice of the race to whidi I belong ' 
and in which I to some extent participate, that it will be attended with 
some disorders, but I say it is one of the necessities which the infernal 
spirit of rebellion and war against human freedom, has brought upon the 
country. I argue that the extension of the elective fi'anchise to black men ' 
in the South is necessary in the first place, to check or counterpoise that 
tendency to disunion wliich prevails among tlie white men of that section 
of the country. Armed resistance to Federal authorit3' in t|je South has 
been defeated, but suppose that the white jjeople there were left as free to 
act as they are to think upor) the subject, does anybody doubt that they 
would now take their States out of the Union? Is it love for the Govern- 
ment or a salutary fear of its power that keeps them where they are ? Alb 
history teaches that the true policy of Government in reference to a sec- 
tion of country that has revolted and been subdued is not to govern by 
extraneous force where it can be avoided, but to create and cherish if pos- 
sible among the people of the rebellious district, a part}' strong iu its num- 
bers and strong in its attachment to the parent Government. Invest the 
loyal black men of the South with the right of suffrage, and they with the 
loyal whites will make a political power there, upon which the Govern- 
ment can depend in anj- emergency. When all militarj- power is with- 
drawn from the South so that it becomes self-governing like the North, 
then there must be a large loyal element there, else when the nation be- 
comes involved in a foreign war, or some similar contiugenc}' arises, a new 
scheme of secession v.-ill fasten itself upon the vitals of the country. I 
say in the second place that the enfranchisement of the blacks in the South 
is necessaiy for their own protection. While they were Slaves pecuniary 
considerations were sufficient with the Slaveholders to ensure their safety. 
Now tliey are compelled to depend i:pon themselves. Think of the matter 
as we may, the black men of the vSouth are not only free, but they are cit- 
izens of the United States. According to the Dred Scott decision they 
were not citizens under the Constitution, because they belonged to an en- 
slaved race, but now their race is no longer enslaved, and the reason of the 
law as laid down in that case having failed, of course the lawfailswith it. I 
presume I do not venture on dispu.ted ground when I say, that the Gov- 
ernment owes equal protection to all citizens and is bound to see that all 
have an equal right to " lil'e, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Situ- 
ated as the black men of the South are in the midst of all the prejudice 
and hate growing out of their former servitude and attachment to the 
Uniou cause, they absolutely need the protection of the ballot or ba3'onet. 
Is it not wiser, easier and more economical to withdraw from them all 
special protection by the Government, and give to them the right to vote, 
with which they may protect themselves? Negro suffrage, then, in the 
Houth. if it be an evil as the Democrats claim it "to be, is not, I affirm, an 
evil so great or dangerous as the ascendency of the rebel spirit there, or 
the necessary employment of military power to defend and protect the 
, friends of the Government. What are the objections to this extension of 



[16] 

sufirria<;-c? Douo-las in his championship of Shxveiy once exclaimed '* This 
is a "white man's Government," and to a class of small politicians who never 
think for themselves, these are oracnlar words. 

I say in the first place as to this dogma, that it is mere assumption and 
no argument. If Douglas meant to say that Slaves were not to participate 
in the government of the country, no doubt he was correct, but if he in- 
tended to say that the protection and privileges of Grovernment should be 
extended to one and denied to another class of citizens, then the assertion 
is at war with all just ideas of a Iiepublican polity. <^ I trust that no white 
man is willing to admit that the control of our Government can ever pass 
from the hands of more than thirty millions of whites to which, besides 
the natural increase, immense additions are made every year by European 
immigrations, into the hands of two or three million blacks, who have 
alrcad}' started down the sorrowful road to ultimate extinction. 

.Assuming what Douglas said to be true, I should like to know where the 
Government of the native born black persons of this country is to be found? 
Are they to be citizens and have no protection? All experience shows 
that the tendency of power is to concentrate in the hands of a few, and 
thus form an aristocrac}^ and therefore the Republican theory v^'as invent- 
ed, so that the low and weak and poor might have political rights with 
which to protect themselves from the selfishness and ambition of those who 
were the favorites of birth or fortune ? Are we afraid to stand upon the 
platform of our institutions? Another objection is that black are inferior 
to white people. Without controverting this position, it is sufficient to 
say, that the Constitution and laws of the country recognize native born 
negToes as citizens. They share like others in all the burdens and duties 
of society. Life, liberty, home, family, friends and property are as dear 
and valuable to them as to others. Education and religion are as neces- 
sary, and vice and crime as hurtful to them as to others. White and black 
are alike susee])tible to injurj^ and suffering: to maim or murder a man, to 
strip him of his property, to destroy or debauch his family, are crimes that 
carr}" wretclicdness and woe to the hearts of black, as well as white vic- 
tims. Admit, then, that the blacks are inferior as the Democrats claiAi, 
they certainly are not "dumb cattle." They are '* persons," and are so 
called by the Constitution of the United States, and they are citizens hold- 
ing the i-elations and having the rights I have indicated, and tliey ought 
therefore to have the necessary power to protect themselves if they are 
ca])able of exercising that pov\-er 

I know upon this question of capacity there is great controversy. Pres- 
ident Johnson in his Sharkey letter, and many of the leading Democratic 
journals such as the Chicago Times, Boston Post and Albany Ai'gus favoi- 
qualified negro suffrage. The objection then, lies not to their natural in- 
ca])acity, but their want of education. I admit that the negroes are not 
as well informed as it is desirable they should be, but I say they have in- 
telligence enough to distinguish between their friends and their enemies, 
and this is the one thing needful for their own protection. Ignorant and 
stupid as the negroes of the South are claimed to be, they und^-stood the 
issues of the late war. They knew when and where and how to fight. 
They knew the difference between Union with freedom and Secession'with 
Slaveiy. When the sinking Confederacy cried out for negro soldiers to 
come to its help, it was like calling " spirits from the vasty deep," but the 
heart of every black man bounded at the sound of the Union bugles, and 
every black hand was ready to strike for the Union cause. To be added 
to what tlie blacks learned during the war, the fact is not to be overlooked! 
that tlaey are rapidly acquiring knowledge by means of the schools and. 



[17] 

chr.rchcs and otbcr facilities for education with which they ure furni.slicd 
— the political discussions that avg everywhere held in their presence — the 
publications of various kinds tiiat are put into their hands; all of which 
they appreciate and use Avith an unconimon zeal for their own improve- 
ment. To "ive them the right to vote is to inspire them with new ardor 
to enlighten and elevate themselves. When we consider that black men 
are employed and trusted in every sphere of labor, it is difficult to see why 
they may not exercise political power as wisely as others in the same 
sphere of life. Ever}- one knows that since the formation of the Govern- 
ment, people have generally been divided into two great political parties, 
known at different times by different appellations. White men at this 
time are divided into two political organizations, one of which is called 
the (hiion Republican or Radical ])arty, and the other the Democratic or 
Conservative party. Xegroes if the}' vote will undoubtedly be incorpo- 
rated into ouc or the other of these parties. Will our Democratic friends 
hold that if they vote the Democratic ticket that they thereby show their 
ignorance and unfitness to vote ? To assume that they are incomjietent to 
vote because they vote the Union ticket is to assume that a large part of 
the most enlightened and patriotic people of the country ought not to en- 
joy the elective franchise. During the war, black men worked and fought 
with the Union men, and they have s ince voted with them, as in the late 
elections in Georgetown. Washington and Tennessee. Education is of 
great value, but it is not the only thing to make a good man or a patriot. 
Who will say that the thousands of educated men who plunged this nation 
into all the horrors of a civil war, are safer depositaries of the voting power 
than the thousands of more ignorant men who fought for the integrity 
and honor of the nation ? Showmeaman whohasthosense and patriotism 
to fight as a volunteer for his country, and I will show you a man who has 
sense and patriotism enough to vote for his country. Is the ballot more 
dangerous than the bayonet in the hands of an ignorant man ? Is there 
no question of right or justice inivolved in this discussion? Are .the 
800,000 black men who threw themselves into the red tide of battle to 
^ave the Government, now to be treated as the enemies of that Govern- 
ment, while its foes, fresh from the fields of their warfare upon it, are 
accepted as its friends and honored with its favors? Is a tl-aitor to be 
trusted because his skin is white, and a patriot tried in the fiery ordeal 
of battle to be distrusted and disfranchised because his skin is black ? Is 
not the nation admonished upon this subject to '' Be just and fear not." 
I do not argue in favor of this feature of the Congressional polic}^ be- 
cause it stands upon debateable ground. The time for argument has 
passed. Black suffrage in the South, whatever may be said or thought about 
it, is a fixed and irreversible fact. Black men are voting there now and they 
• will continue to vote. Suffrage takes no backward steps. Popular rights 
widen and deepen by agitation, and under a Republican form of Govern- 
inont no considerable class of people can be disfranchised after they have 
once exercised the right to vote. Intelligent men of the South seem to 
take this view of the subject. They accept the situation. The}- do not 
■^iropose to fight longer over the suffrage question. Every interest of 
society dictates a different course. I invite your attention as to this point 
10 a letter written by Gen. Longstreet of the rebel service, dated June 3d, 
18(57, in Avhich be says: 

•The highest of human laws is the law that is established by appeal to 
arms. The great principles that divided political parties prior to the war 
■vore thoroughly discussed by our wisest statesmen. When argument was 



[18] 



/ 



exhausted, resort was had to compromise. When compromi.se was un- 
availing, discussion M-as renewed and expedients were sought, but none 
could be found to suit the emergenc}-. Appeal was finally made to the 
sword to determine which of the claims was the true construction of con- 
stitutional laAV. The sword has decided in favor of the North, and what^ 
they claimed to be principles ceased to be ])rinciples, and are become law. 
The vicAvs that we hold cease to be principles, because they are opposed 
to law. It is therefore our duty to abandon ideas that are obsolete and 
conform to the requirements of law. The Military l)ill and amendments 
are peace offerings. We should accept them as such, and place ourselves 
upon them as the starting ]ioint from which to meet future political issues 
as they arise. Like other Southern men, I naturally sought alliance with 
tb.e Democratic part3^ merely. because it was opposed to the Eepublican 
party. J3ut as far as I can judge, there is nothing tangible about it, except 
the issues that were staked upon the war and there lost. Finding nothing 
to take hold of excej^t .prejudice, which cannot be worked into good for 
anjr one, it is proper and right that I should seek some standpoint from 
which good ma}' be done. If I appreciate the j-jrinciples of the Demo- 
cratic party, its prominent features oppose the enfranchisement of the 
colored man, and deny the right to legislate upon the subject of suffrage, 
except by the States, ijidividually. These two features have a tendency 
to exclude Southern men from that party j for the colored man is already 
enfranchised here ; and we cannot seek alliance with a party tiiat would 
restrict his rights." 

Longstreet seems to regard the issues of the rebellion and those made 
by the Democratic party as identical, for he says '' there is nothing tan- 
gible about that party except the issues that were staked upon the war 
and there lost." He says with great good sense that '^ the colored man is 
already enfranchised and the South cannot seek alliance with a party that 
would restrict his rights." 

Few persons will fail to appreciate the force of Longstreet's remark in 
saying that there is nothing to take hold of in the Democratic party 
" except prejudice which cannot be worked into good for any one." Call 
to mind the Democratic speeches that you have read and heard and wdiat 
besides an appeal to prejudice do they contain 'i Do the}^ address the gen- 
erous or patriotic impulses of the heart? Do they ever plead for the poor 
and weak and those who need care and sympath}^ ? Are they not on the 
contrary replete Avith denunciation and all uncharitableness ? Has the 
Democratic party any kind or encouraging words for those who are fly- 
ing to rise from the long dark night of Slavery into the day light of Free- 
dom, or does it howl for a chance to put its foot upon their necks and 
trample them into a lower degradation 't Much effort is made to excite 
alarm bj^ the cry about the equality and amalgamation of the races. I 
advocate nothing of that kind. All I say is, that political power should 
be so diffused among the people as to secure the peace of the country and 
t!ie j^rotection of the citizen. To give to colored people freedom, educa- 
tion, religion and property, is as objectionable in tending to equality as to 
give to them the right to vote. Every man is free to seek his own society 
in this country. He may go up to where the wise aud good and pure 
have their abiding places, or he may go down to the too populous hells of 
wickedness, vice and crime. There is no compulsion as to social taste and| 
position. Will it tend to amalgamation to give to negroes the power toj 
protect themselves ? Would it be better in this respect to have a state of) 
things in which marriage was not respected and where every colored' 

■ / 



[10] 

)iniin, wife, mother, or daughter, is a lielploss victim to tiio lust of any 
|iionii<atc wretch who might fix his evil eye upon her? I know full we'll 
;lic' i)iindness and obstinacy of pas.siou and prejuilicc. To fight them as 
Knion men are doing involves a severe and protracted struggle. Our 
iiMpe is in the intelligence, virtue and patriotism of the ])eo))le. When 
liinagogucs urge a repudiation of the public debt, we must strive to main- 
lain the plighted fiiith, good name and honor of the nation^and trust to 
;lie patriotism as against the sordid passions of the people. When they 
iivoke hate, prejudice and a proscriptive spirit in our Republican system, 
'Hir dut}' is to contend as our F^^ithers did that all men have an inalienable 
right to "life, libei-t^' and the pursuit of happiness." 

.Vo doubt we shall meet with teniporary and local reverses as we did 
during the war, but now as then we shall eventually triumj)h. 1 judge 
of the future from the j^ast, and through ages there has been a conflict 
between privilege and prerogative — between class exclusion and pop- 
ular right, and to-day the conflict is going on in Europe, as it is in 
America. Aristocracy there argues that to allow laboring men to vote 
would cheapen and corrupt the elective franchise. Democracy in Amer- 
ica endorses and echoes back the argument. Strong as these allies are 
they are bound to be defeated, for truth is mightier than error, and justice 
stronger than prejudice. I am not carried away in my views of this 
question by any fanciful theor3\ Government is a practical thing. 
Wrong and consequent suffering make it a necessity, and to compel these 
to give ])lace to right and hap])iness is the end I would keep in view. I 
would act \ipon this pi'inciple in respect to the rebels of the vSouth. I am 
opposed to any vindictive or revengeful policy as to those people. I have 
no doubt of their hostility to the Federal Union, and I have thought it 
unsafe, therefore, to ])ut political power into their hands until time and 
reflection had somewhat allayed the fiery passions of war. I know that 
ihey have persecuted even unto deatli the tlnion men among them, and I 
have thought it the duty of the Government to protect its friends and 
provide for the future peace of the nation. " This is the head and front 
of our offending." Individuals have indulged in violent speeches and sug- 
gestions, but the voice of the Union party has not been for confiscation 
ur blood but rather for justice and protection to the weak and defenceless. 
and pardon with security for their good behavior to those whose various 
rrimes against God and man make the • bloodiest picture in the Book of 
Time." 

I conclude with a word or two more. Two elections are to take place 
ucxt year in Oregon. I know that a majority of the legal voters of this 
State belong to the Union party. A\^ith wise counsels and proper energj- 
we shall prevail. Wo must lay aside as far as practicable, personal rival- 
vies and local jealousies. We must obey the will of the people in our pri- 
miiry conventions. Let us heed the lesson taught by the California elect- 
ion, and not forget that honesty in politics, as in everything else, is the 
1,,-t policy. We should make our true men candidates "for office. I hope 
'iHiiii parties will adopt that policy. I would prefer, if we are to be beaten, 
t,, ^le the veterans and not the mercenaries of the opposition chosen to 
„tlir. . Better for the character of the State and for all concerned that the 
ivliai'le and I'cpresentative men of one party or the other should be put in 
j,,i,ver rather than any of those who hanging on the outskirts of both, are 
;v:i:iy lor gain to go with either party. 1 go in for a bold and manly fight 
,!|nir principles. If they are right we shall win, if they are wrong we 
,iiali be defeated Let us, if we do not succeed, at least deserve succ( 
nil if we are to be overcome, let us go down with our drums beating i 



I 



[20] 

oar banners flying, jind wc sliull " rise'iTi<;5ain." But wo shall not fail. 
There is no such Avord in Ihe lexicon of qur party. Can it be that political 
power at this time is to pa,ss into the hands of those who sympathize with 
secession — the ehampiofts of Human Slavei-y — the enemies of progress — 
the allies of aristocracy and the advocates of national dishonor ! I have 
too much confidence in the intelligence and patriotism of the people to be- 
lieve it. Whatever the future may bi'ing forth, we can always be justly 
l)r()ud of ou|^ party record.. We have fought and vanquished Secession. 
We have redeemed the IvcjMiblic from the shame and curse of Slavery. 
We have saved the existence, the power and glory of the nation. All the 
great victories of the war arc our victories. All its glorious achievements 
for Freedom, Humanity and Justice are our achievements. While tlK> 
busy fingers of history arc weaving chaplets of fame for Grant and Sher- 
man and Sheridan, they are only crowning the chieftains and heroes of our 
unconquered party. Consistent witli our record in war shall be our pur- 
])0ses in peace. Our jjolic}^ is to ensu]'e domestic tranquility, to dispo! 
ignorance and diflTuse knowledge ; to maintain freedom, and to do justice 
to all men ; to enlighten and elevate humanit_y, and to make the Govern- 
ment of this great Eepublic as ftir as human passions and frailties will al- 
low, oi'ie in which "Mercy aud truth are met together, and righteousness 
and peace have kissed each other." 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



013 786 518 ft 



Pri))t<!(l Ht A. (i. Walking <t Co.'s Book anri Job Office, Portland^ 



.// 



\ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

\' If nil i: mil II 111 I III 



013 786 518 A • 



